I am the current maintainer of the AUR package
ttf-google-webfonts-hg[4], and I'm bothered by the mess of various
packages there are for Google's Web Fonts project. It's not at all
KISS in its current state.
There are currently four different AUR packages[1][2][3][4] that
essentially supply the same files, and all four packages conflict with
each other. Around August of 2012, the package named
ttf-google-webfonts[1] was orphaned, and user w0ng created a GitHub
repository[5] that mirrors the Mercurial repository[6] on Google Code
(why?). Then, the new maintainer changed the original
ttf-google-webfonts package from a VCS-type package that simply lacked
"-hg" in the name to a package that pulls tarballs from w0ng's GitHub
repo[5].
As you can see in the comments for ttf-google-webfonts[1], this has
caused all sorts of confusion and messages about the package being
out-of-date or having invalid checksums. To get around these issues,
user epinephrine created the package ttf-google-webfonts-git[3] that
clones w0ng's GitHub repo[5] instead of pulling tarballs from it,
which significantly reduces the maintenance required on the package.
Then, user Gently created a package named
ttf-google-webfonts-distilled[2] that pulls a tarball from w0ng's
GitHub repo[5] and only installs a small subset of the fonts therein.
Shortly after ttf-google-webfonts[1] was changed from being a
Mercurial-based package and not liking the direction that the package
was taking, I reuploaded the original ttf-google-webfonts package as
ttf-google-webfonts-hg[4] for people that simply wanted the old
package back that uses the actual Google Web Fonts repository to
download the files.
To clean up this mess, I propose that ttf-google-webfonts-distilled[2]
and ttf-google-webfonts-git[3] be deleted outright, for what should be
obvious reasons. I also propose that ttf-google-webfonts[1] be deleted
because of how frequently the Web Fonts project is updated and because
the project lacks version numbers. If people really feel strongly
about keeping that maintenance nightmare, then let them have it, but I
really don't see what advantage it provides over the original
ttf-google-webfonts-hg[4] other than one less makedepends.
I apologize for the huge email, but this situation really is a mess.
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ttf-google-webfonts/
[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ttf-google-webfonts-distilled/
[3] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ttf-google-webfonts-git/
[4] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ttf-google-webfonts-hg/
[5] https://github.com/w0ng/googlefontdirectory
[6] https://code.google.com/p/googlefontdirectory/
Jason
Howdy,
I have a PKGBUILD that requires git-lfs. It fails every time, even though, as far as I know the syntax is correct. I was told that possibly git pulling in the prepare() function would fix the issues, but I can't seem to get it working. I have attached the PKGBUILD. Can someone please help get this working?
Thanks for the help
Storm
--
Powered by Arch Linux! I am registered Linux user number 508465: https://linuxcounter.net/user/508465.html
My blog, Thoughts of a Dragon: http://www.stormdragon.tk/
get my public PGP key: gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-key 43DDC193
Twitter and Facebook are so ... yesteryear. Get your 2MB Social account TODAY! http://2mb.social/main/register
How many Internet mail list subscribers does it take to change a lightbulb? http://goo.gl/eO4PJ
"I've seen the tempest in darkest nights I've faced the eyes of Thor"
Stormwarrior - Heading Northe
Hi
I stumpled upon an AUR package where the install file executes the
installed program[0].
My assumption is, managing the start of services is done by the user and
shouldn't happen on installing a package.
And now I'm wondering if there is a rule about this (didn't find one) or
more like an agreement to not do such a thing.
Or is it even perfectly fine to implement it.
Best regards
Lex
______
[0]
https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/xfce-polkit.install?h=xfce-polk…
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 18 packages missing signoffs
* 6 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (18 total) ==
* arm-none-eabi-newlib-2.4.0-2 (any)
0/2 signoffs
* avr-libc-2.0.0-2 (any)
0/2 signoffs
* acpi_call-1.1.0-47 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* arm-none-eabi-gcc-6.1.1-1 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* avr-gcc-6.1.1-1 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* bbswitch-0.8-50 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* r8168-8.042-2 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r3-12 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* vhba-module-20140928-30 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* virtualbox-modules-arch-5.0.20-4 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* acpi_call-1.1.0-47 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* arm-none-eabi-gcc-6.1.1-1 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* avr-gcc-6.1.1-1 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* bbswitch-0.8-50 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* r8168-8.042-2 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r3-12 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* vhba-module-20140928-30 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* virtualbox-modules-arch-5.0.20-4 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
== All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (6 total) ==
* avr-gcc-6.1.1-1 (i686), since 2016-05-09
* arm-none-eabi-gcc-6.1.1-1 (i686), since 2016-05-09
* avr-gcc-6.1.1-1 (x86_64), since 2016-05-09
* arm-none-eabi-gcc-6.1.1-1 (x86_64), since 2016-05-09
* avr-libc-2.0.0-2 (any), since 2016-05-10
* arm-none-eabi-newlib-2.4.0-2 (any), since 2016-05-10
== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 18 packages missing signoffs
* 6 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (18 total) ==
* arm-none-eabi-newlib-2.4.0-2 (any)
0/2 signoffs
* avr-libc-2.0.0-2 (any)
0/2 signoffs
* acpi_call-1.1.0-47 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* arm-none-eabi-gcc-6.1.1-1 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* avr-gcc-6.1.1-1 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* bbswitch-0.8-50 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* r8168-8.042-2 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r3-12 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* vhba-module-20140928-30 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* virtualbox-modules-arch-5.0.20-4 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* acpi_call-1.1.0-47 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* arm-none-eabi-gcc-6.1.1-1 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* avr-gcc-6.1.1-1 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* bbswitch-0.8-50 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* r8168-8.042-2 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r3-12 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* vhba-module-20140928-30 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* virtualbox-modules-arch-5.0.20-4 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
== All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (6 total) ==
* avr-gcc-6.1.1-1 (i686), since 2016-05-09
* arm-none-eabi-gcc-6.1.1-1 (i686), since 2016-05-09
* avr-gcc-6.1.1-1 (x86_64), since 2016-05-09
* arm-none-eabi-gcc-6.1.1-1 (x86_64), since 2016-05-09
* avr-libc-2.0.0-2 (any), since 2016-05-10
* arm-none-eabi-newlib-2.4.0-2 (any), since 2016-05-10
== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==